Leave or stay in the EU?

[Rhekimos]

My amateur numbers are just as good as your government body estimates? No, better!

And they show we'll clear our national debt just by leaving the EU!

Hooray, this guy should be responsible for all our finances!

Furthermore the fact that this man was able to math up these numbers proves that our treasury is lying to us. (As per the Youtube "Smashes the Treasuries lies in 60 seconds!" description.)


I'll give it that it's a positive message (aside from the we can't trust the government one bit part of it) and this guy is probably smart, but you can't deny that it seems a tad silly if you take a step back.

[Murmillus_Prime]

My amateur numbers are just as good as your government body estimates? No, better!

And they show we'll clear our national debt just by leaving the EU!

Hooray, this guy should be responsible for all our finances!

Furthermore the fact that this man was able to math up these numbers proves that our treasury is lying to us. (As per the Youtube "Smashes the Treasuries lies in 60 seconds!" description.)


I'll give it that it's a positive message (aside from the we can't trust the government one bit part of it) and this guy is probably smart, but you can't deny that it seems a tad silly if you take a step back.

Well he seems like an educated bloke, but who am I to judge?

More positivity shown than the bremain project fear campaign,  at least and if he's right it also counters the project fear claim that the U.K will be financially worse off after a brexit.

[Molly]

...the EU Out campaign is much better ofc.

[Rhekimos]

Well he seems like an educated bloke, but who am I to judge?

Educated is a swear word now?

Ah yes because we can always trust our governments..

https://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/4g43qq/what_person_or_brand_was_forgiven_way_too_easily/

From the second top comment and its replies.

I don't see your point. Governments should be held accountable for what they do. How does that tie to this?

How does one deed of a past government of a different country implicate this treasury? Isn't this the same generalization pitfall that you railed against a few posts ago?

More positivity shown than the bremain project fear campaign,  at least and if he's right it also counters the project fear claim that the U.K will be financially worse off after a brexit.

True, the don't leave side is much more negative. But how do you frame losing things in a positive way? Trade deals and place in the world, much would be in flux.
Whether it's overly negative and overplays fears, that might be.
Some financial concern is very realistic however.

[Murmillus_Prime]

Educated is a swear word now?

I don't see your point. Governments should be held accountable for what they do. How does that tie to this?

How does one deed of a past government of a different country implicate this treasury? Isn't this the same generalization pitfall that you railed against a few posts ago?

No educated is not a swear word.

The more that power is centralised into a political entity whos president (wheher that be of the council, comission or parliament) has not been directly elected by the electorate of individual member states, and is not possible to be held directly accountable by individual member state's electorate then in its current state is arguably less democratically accountable and is anti-democratic.

Also, the point you make of me apparently generalising about the conduct of current governments based on that of past governments is irrelvent. It's irrelevent because the conduct of current governments have already undermined much of the trust the people may have had in them prior to being elected. This is for numerous reasons, breaking election campaign promises being the least concerning.

[Rhekimos]

No educated is not a swear word.

I'm glad you think so.

The more that power is centralised into a political entity whos president has not been directly elected by the electorate of individual member states, and is not possible to be held directly accountable by individual member state's electorate then it's arguably less democratically accountable, antidemocratic.

Would you also support breaking the UK into smaller pieces that could be even more democratic than now? Is the most important point to maximize democracy? There is some point to the democratic deficit consideration of EU though.

Also, the point you make of me apparently generalising about the conduct of current governments based on that of past governments is irrelvent. It's irrelevent because the conduct of current governments have already undermined much of the trust their populace had in them prior to being elected, and this is for numerous reasons, breaking election campaign promises being the least concerning.

Yes, the winning political parties are never quite 100% true to what they promised. Or at least I've never seen that.

[Murmillus_Prime]

I'm glad you think so.

Would you also support breaking the UK into smaller pieces that could be even more democratic than now? Is the most important point to maximize democracy? There is some point to the democratic deficit consideration of EU though.

I think the electoral system needs to be rebuilt around a platform of proportional representation, but I do not support the breaking up of the United Kingdom. That said, I still support peoples democratic right to self determination should they choose it.

During the Scottish referendum I was in favour of Scottish independence. I've since done a 180 degee flip on that position and would now be opposed to it. The main reason being, they may have gained their independence from the U.K, but would still be happy being under the thumb of the EU which in my view means that they would not be truly independent.

[Rhekimos]

I think the electoral system needs to be rebuilt around a platform of proportional representation, but I do not support the breaking up of the United Kingdom. That said, I still support peoples democratic right to self determination should they choose it.

Both nice principles.

[Angantyr]

Concerning the economic argument, be mindful that both Switzerland and Norway, through the European Free Trade Association (EFTA), are not in the EU but have exactly the same terms of trade as do member states.

[Murmillus_Prime]

Concerning the economic argument, be mindful that both Switzerland and Norway, through the European Free Trade Association (EFTA), are not in the EU but have exactly the same terms of trade as do member states.

Which if true indicates it is possible to still trade with the EU on good terms while not being a part of its political union. To consider that point and then the fact that by GDP the U.K is the fith largest  and Switzerland the 20th globally... One could conclude things look good, better for Britain being out of the EU.

[Angantyr]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Free_Trade_Association#Free_trade_agreements

The European Free Trade Association (EFTA) is an intergovernmental trade organisation and free trade area consisting of four European states: Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway, and Switzerland.[1] The organisation operates in parallel with the European Union (EU), and all four member states participate in the EU's single market.[2]

It was established on 1 January 1994 following an agreement with the European Community (which had become the EU two months earlier).[27] It allows the EFTA-EEA states to participate in the EU's Internal Market without being members of the EU. They adopt almost all EU legislation related to the single market, except laws on agriculture and fisheries. However, they also contribute to and influence the formation of new EEA relevant policies and legislation at an early stage as part of a formal decision-shaping process.[28] One EFTA member, Switzerland, has not joined the EEA but has a series of bilateral agreements, including a free trade agreement, with the EU.

[Tibes]

No educated is not a swear word.

....

Nobody here still understands what your point about education was. I swear man, do you even understand the point of your own gibberish? 

[Murmillus_Prime]

Nobody here still understands what your point about education was. I swear man, do you even understand the point of your own gibberish? 

I could count at least two, yourself included.

I was implying that education may have played a positive role in that mans ability to deduce that leaving the EU would be better for Britain's finances.. So instead of taking a wholly negative view toward education/education systems I thought I'd be a little more balanced.

I have to actually spell that out to you?... Of course I had to. Who am I kidding?

[Rhekimos]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Free_Trade_Association#Free_trade_agreements

Concerning the economic argument, be mindful that both Switzerland and Norway, through the European Free Trade Association (EFTA), are not in the EU but have exactly the same terms of trade as do member states. This is somewhat incorrect, for example rules of origin for trade which are meaningful for tariffs are different for EU and EFTA members.

"The process of adapting to rules of origin-based duty-free trade under a new UK-EU free trade agreement would be tedious, costly and disruptive to trade."
Trade Policy Research Centre
http://tprc.org.uk/media/PDF_documents/Rules_of_Origin_in_EU_FTAs_-_February_2012_-_FINAL_c.pdf

Yes? This is the Norwegian model often mentioned in relevant discussion. Before UK could leave or join, there would be long negotiations. Or a purging of relations and very long and difficult negotiations. And both Norway and Switzerland are under EU law. Just without any voting power. And pay for accessing the single market. That's not exactly what the Leave campaign has been promising I think.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/oct/27/norway-eu-reality-uk-voters-seduced-by-norwegian-model
"We pay, but have no say: that’s the reality of Norway’s relationship with the EU"
By Former Minister of Foreign Affairs of Norway.

These negotiations resulted in a total of ten treaties, negotiated in two phases, the sum of which makes a large share of EU law

applicable to Switzerland. The treaties are:
Bilateral I agreements (signed 1999, in force 1 June 2002)

    Free movement of people
    Air traffic
    Road traffic
    Agriculture
    Technical trade barriers
    Public procurement
    Science

Bilateral II agreements

    Security and asylum and Schengen membership
    Cooperation in fraud pursuits
    Final stipulations in open questions about agriculture, environment, media, education, care of the elderly, statistics and services.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Switzerland%E2%80%93European_Union_relations#Treaties

The EEA agreement grants Norway access to the EU's internal market. From the 23,000 EU laws currently in force,[2] the EEA has incorporated around 5,000 (in force)[3] meaning that Norway is subject to roughly 21% of EU law. This arrangement facilitates free movement of goods, capital, services and people between the EU and EFTA members including Norway.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norway%E2%80%93European_Union_relations#European_Economic_Area

So the scary ISIS guys that the leave guys keep mentioning can still "come and go" even if UK goes this route.


Here's a research paper also presented to the parliament if you want some serious reading on the issue and the options and the ramifications:
https://www.parliament.uk/briefing-papers/rp13-42.pdf

More on the models by a political scientist and why the Swiss clusterfuck model is unlikely:
http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/europpblog/2013/01/28/uk-eu-euroscepticism-norway-model-swiss-model-efta/

[Jambi]

if Brittain leaves, then lol.

EU will simply put all those immigrants on the ferry from France to England without any EU policy holding them back, and England will have no way to send them back. since France checks both ends

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juxtaposed_controls

Ireland will also be kind of ff'ed if brittain leaves the eu.